United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: NARRATIVE FAIL: Florida School Shooter Did NOT Use 'High-Capacity' Magazines
Source:
DailyWire
URL Source: https://www.dailywire.com/news/2779 ... oter-did-not-use-ryan-saavedra
Published: Mar 2, 2018
Author: Ryan Saavedra
Post Date: 2018-03-02 22:01:41 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 4758
Comments: 51
While Democratic politicians insist on infringing on the rights of law-abiding Americans to prevent the next mass shooting, a report from earlier this week that received barely any attention shows that their efforts would not have stopped the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School gunman. House Democrats introduced an assault weapons ban bill this week that would also "prohibit the sale, transfer, production, and importation of semi-automatic rifles and pistols that have a magazine or can accept a magazine that can hold more than 10 bullets, and any ammunition-feeding device that can hold more than 10 bullets." This bill would have done nothing to prevent the Parkland shooting as the gunman did not use "high-capacity" magazines, he used 10-round magazines. The Miami Herald reports: [The shooter] went in with only 10-round magazines because larger clips would not fit in his duffel bag. ... The information came from Democratic State Sen. Lauren Book (Plantation) who said the "weapon and bullets were not high quality and were breaking apart." The Herald further noted: A weapons expert told the Herald that jamming is a major weakness of the AR-15 platform and that the rifles “are prone to this type of problem if not cleaned thoroughly.” Several state legislators who visited the school with crime-scene investigators said they learned from police that [the shooter]’s rifle was not top-of-the-line, perhaps explaining the malfunction. Before the weapon jammed, the 19-year-old tried to shoot out a third-floor window in the freshman building of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School so he could spray bullets onto helpless students and staff below. But the hurricane-impact glass did not break.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-10) not displayed.
.
.
.
#11. To: Tooconservative (#10)
The barrel (which IS the rifle) will be stamped ".223/5.56". Also, the higher quality barrels are stamped with "HP" (high pressure) and/or "MP" (magnetic particle). It should be in the rifle specifications. Mine reads, "The bolt is multi lugged similar to that of the M16/M4 series rifle. The bolt is proofed with a 70,000 psi proof round and then magnetic particle inspected to ensure against stress fractures." The barrel is stamped "MP".
That is the fun part. But you may end up replacing those anyways. When a rifle is loaded up that way, the seller doesn't usually provide top quality accessories.
Not for me. Over the years, the whole shopping experience has become excruciating for me. Having too many choices actually makes me unhappy. That particular seller is quite...parsimonious...about revealing some of the brand names on the accessories being sold. Most of the time, you can identify them from the pics but you have to wonder why they deliberately choose to omit the brand/model of each accessory in the package. Well, obviously they do it for a reason, it's no oversight.
People are crazy. My rifle came with spring-loaded, foldable back-up iron sights (BUIS). Many riles come standard with no BUIS, so I considered that a plus. But critics said the sights were clunky and the first thing they would do is replace them with Magpul Mbus sights. Why? The BUIS were free, they work just fine, and they're BACK UP. (Your primary sight is a scope or red dot.) But no. They'd rip them off and replace them with $150 BUIS. Because they're "Magpul", I guess.
Plus he threw in a folding bipod, laser sight, forward grip and flashlight -- in addition to the red dot, 4X scope and iron sights. There may be an AM/FM radio I overlooked.
I wouldn't be surprised if they give more info if you register for the site. What I'm seeing is the looky-loo version. If you were logged in on their site - and therefore a lot more serious - you might get full details from their listings. Otherwise, I can see no reason why anyone would buy any of their package deals. Yet, I see they offer a lot of those, for most any gun they sell. So someone must like their superkit deals. Selling guns is way too competitive for people to spend on package deals like that without more info than what we see on that site. So there has to be more to it, I think.
If you scroll down, you'll find the following info (which I've reorganized): * Bushmaster AR15 Quick Respons Carbine Rifle .223/5.56mm * (5) 30-round Magazines * Plano Locking Hard Case 42" * Weather Guard High Profile Red Dot Sight * Heavy-Duty, Single-Point, Nylon Sling * UTG Rail Covers * Vector Optics Bipod * Vector Optics Ultra-bright Green Laser * 150-lumen Weapon light * Aluminum carbine-length quad rail * Light weight foregrip with pressure switch for the green laser * 4x Vector Optics Goliath Scope with Red, Green and Blue illuminated reticle. You can search the web for prices on most of these accessories. The red dot sight, for example, is $69. Hmmmm. My advice. Get the basic Bushmaster and accessorize as you get the money. Take your time. Do your research on the items that fit your needs. For example, I do most of my shooting at 50 yards outdoors. I calibrated my sights for 50 yards. So I don't need a scope, laser, flashlight, bipod, etc. I used that money to buy quality accessories.
That sounds downright lame. I can pretty much buy what I want, limited by my Scroogey instincts. I've been looking more recently at Sig Sauer MPX, IWI mini-Tabor, Steyr AUG. I think I mentioned before that I want one really good rifle to be my mainstay, not some endless cycle of upgrades, even if most people just love all the upgrades available. I do like the the Bushmaster AR-15s but they're still a $750 gun. Maybe a bit more. I see some AR-15s (like Colt's) are up $150-$200 since the Florida shooting, possibly ending the "Trump slump" the gun industry has been in for the last year. Of course, that affects the mass market guns like the AR-15s much more than the higher-end rifles where I've noticed almost no price changes. Trump's gungrabbing remarks have helped the lower end of the gun market a lot more than the high-end stuff.
Nice guns. You like the bullpups?
Here is one auction I saw on the IWI Tabor Gen 2 that intrigued me. If you asked me, of all the guns I've read reviews of and priced at the online gun sites and I had to order one Right Now, this one or something very similar would probably be my pick. By the time you price out the components (five $12 mags, $88 Plano case, $220 VISM ECO 4X34 Scope w/green laser), I think it is $100-$150 too high plus the $50 shipping fee. But a gun package like that from Cabelas or a local FFL (I have both a boyhoood friend and two shirttail relatives with FFLs) under $2K and I would find it hard to resist. But those Sig MPX guns are intriguing too. Sig has kinda crapped on some of its Gen 1 MPX customers though so I really hate that. A premium gun company should make it right, given the prices they charge for their premium guns. Otherwise, they're just scumbags with expensive guns IMO. We're seeing some strong undercurrents of new tech. These come and go in the gun industry. The market is hungry for new tech. One new gun that I find a little too much is that Franklin Armory Reformation. I don't know how they got that thing past the ATF's licensing but they did. For now. And their special finned ammo (to get any accuracy at a distance) may be the Next Great Thing but they still don't have a major ammo maker ready to provide those bullets at a decent price. If the ammo were available and at a decent price, that gun might be hard to resist. So compact.
Does it show? : ) Yeah. As long as stuff doesn't get blown in my face. I'll always shoot with hearing protection anyway unless it's a (unlikely) sudden home defense scenario. I see online how some guys have had to make "beard guards" to get their beards from catching on fire when shooting a few of these guns, at least from the left shoulder. I don't have a beard but that just sounds bad to me. LOL Some of these effects can be minimized with fairly inexpensive aftermarket addons to redirect spent shells and exhaust. But I know that you can appreciate why I try to be conscious of ambidexterity. These high-end guns all claim to be ambidextrous but some really fall short compared to the others. I'll always shoot right-handed but, if I'm buying an alleged ambidextrous rifle, I want it to be actually ambidextrous (without setting somebody's beard on fire). These are high-end guns; I don't want any chickenshit surprises after the purchase.
Being a left-handed shooter, that was obviously my main concern. I shot my son's Colt AR-15 left-handed and got tired of the ejected shells passing in front of me and the hot gasses in my face. Plus, all the controls were on the wrong side. After much research, I ended up with the Beretta ARX-100. 100% ambidextrous, modular for easy take down, used by the (Italian) military, and piston operated. They offer a 10" barrel as an option, but never did come out with the .300 AAC Blackout barrel. This rifle is not for you if you want to customize. But in return, you get a battle-tested, reliable rifle from Beretta.
Quick overview of some quality rifles.
Interesting selection and ratings. He seems to reach many of the same conclusions I've read and seen in other reviews of these guns. He covered the top non-AR15 choices in December 2016. There have been a few changes in the rankings of what's hot and what's not. For all I complain about overshopping, you also need to do some due diligence so you don't get a nasty surprise later. Even excluding the AR15 from this guy's list, most of these guns still accept multiple AR-15 addons like triggers. You can't really just discount all the aftermarket stuff. Especially when so many guns come with just iron sights (or no sights) and second-rate triggers. AR-15 is still the gorilla in the room, even if you're trying to pretend it's not there. He indicates that several of these guns could have become very major players but for scarcity of aftermarket part options. Other guns did get the accessories and were more successful. The AR-15 and some of these high-end guns have those accessories or can use some of the AR-15 stuff. AR-15. It is that gorilla. It seems to suck dry the entire aftermarket parts industry. You can't ignore it. The more I've shopped, the more it strikes me how dominant it really is now.
No doubt. But it's still a second generation, right-handed, direct impingement rifle with no folding stock capability. Cleaning and oiling is still an issue. And once you start customizing, you've lost any standard for reliability. Unless you're Tuco.
It should be excluded. How can you compare a $750 second generation rifle to these monsters? It's not fair to either side.
My point was that even when you try to exclude the AR-15, its aftermarket parts availability affects many of these weapons as well. You can't entirely exclude the AR-15. It's still there with its mags, its triggers, its control/trigger grouping, its stocks, etc. And the ready availability and choices of those AR-15 parts affects your purchase decisions even if you aren't buying an AR-15. I am still looking at the CZ 805 Bren (SCAR knockoff for $800 less) and at the SCAR 16 itself (it pushes my Scrooge button and it's just too big for me). But the SCAR is a larger rifle than I want and the CZ Bren is a little too proprietary with a lack of aftermarket support. So I'm still leaning toward IWI Tavor Gen 2, the "micro-Tavor". It's third-gen, modern, bullpup, takes some AR-15 accessories, etc. They made some mistakes with their Gen 1 but have made those right IMO. And you can rely on IWI to continue supporting it, both as a military/police rifle and as a very profitable civilian rifle here in the States. Oy vey! LOL
If I ever got a bullpup, I'd probably get the IWI Tavor X95 (converted to left- hand shooting, of course). Excellent for close quarters, but not all that great on the range at 100 yards.
That is kinda holding me back. With a 300BLK version, you could probably do better groups. A lot of AR-15's have better accuracy for $400-$500 less. But they also lack some of the Tavor's features. I've noticed a number of reviewers saying they expected better accuracy. I watched another video review today saying that. This reviewer says the old Tavor is more accurate than the Tavor X-95. With Tavor, you are buying an IDF weapon. All their weapons are targeted to very specific roles. So their weapons do have some limitations as most any bullpup does. A 16" barrel should do a little better than what the Tavor is. A lot of reviewers seem to think so. It's not terrible but it's nothing to brag on either. Some cheaper rifles shoot more accurately in the 150-300 yard range, even with good optics on that Tavor and shooting from a stand with quality ammo. That is what has me hesitating. At that price, you shouldn't have to accept less than high accuracy. 2 MOA just leaves me uneasy. I need all the help I can get. : )
My ARX-100 is 2 MOA. Most combat rifles are. But I go back to my original question -- what do you want to do with it? Hunting? Home defense? Target shooting at 100+ yards? Plinking at less than 100 yards? That's going to determine your rifle AND your accessories. Hunting and long range target practice, for example, will require a scope not a red dot -- and an accurate rifle. It's no fun shooting long range and constantly being off target.
The U.S. version of the IWI Tavor X95 has a 16.5" barrel -- which is required by law. I'm assuming all the X95 accuracy videos used a 16.5" barrel.
Yes. Even more reason to expect a little more from it. OTOH, the CZ 805 Bren is a 2 MOA rifle too. I'll keep shopping. I have managed to find a few more interesting scope choices in the process so my reading is doing some good. I'm not going to spend $1k-$2k on a scope so I should be looking at what $200-$600 scopes can do on these guns in the hands of experienced shooters. Of course, one of the reasons you buy a more expensive gun is so you can shoot cheap ammo and cheap mags in it all day long without any real headaches. Some of these guns can shoot thousands and thousands of cheap rounds and barely need a cleaning. You see people racking up huge numbers on reliability. And reliability (a gun that shoots) is a nice quality as compared to a gun with high accuracy at various ranges that is susceptible to jams or requires really expensive ammo to be achieve accuracy and jam-free operation. So, are you seriously considering an upgrade or just flirting with the idea of what you'd buy if money was a secondary concern?
All of the above! : ) I've come to the conclusion that a home-defense CivWar2 anti-zombie gun might not be the perfect choice to hunt deer or to use as a sniper rifle.
The boss of the house is still upset about cost of the ARX-100, so I haven't given it much thought. I don't think it would be a bullpup, though. I have a .45 Colt SAA revolver. I've always wanted to get the Winchester 1873 rifle (chambered in the same .45 long Colt). They're around $1,000, so I may have to wait until you-know-who calms down.
Two thousand rounds at 30 cents per round -- that's almost the price of a cheap AR-15. Something to think about.
I am giving the bullpup allure some second thought. That inherent guaranteed lack of accuracy compared to garden-variety AR-15s at half the price is something you can't ignore. I am looking harder at Sig's MCX Virtus and MCX Rattler. Mostly the MCX Virtus carbine in 5.56 that shoots well under 1MOA at 50 yards with cheapish optics. And Sig has built it as a military rifle. They've got it in contention to be France's new battle rifle. Well, in the first-gen MCX rifles, several thousand had a potential problem with a drop test at the factory, not by any rifle owner. They just did a recall on them, upgraded the Gen 1 units. Well, the new parts were no longer compatible with the Giesselle custom triggers. So Giesselle made some new compatible triggers and the people who had those got that upgrade free (paid by Sig). Now, that is standing behind the product and making things right. Sig also has a very highly-regarded 4 lb trigger, considered well above the usual milspec triggers that everyone promptly replaces with a $200-$300 trigger. Sig had that problem with that handgun that would go off if dropped. That was pretty bad, indicating no serious drop testing. But it was some years back. Now they just got the big new Army contract to make the Sig P320 MHS the Army's official handgun, beating out the Glock 19 MHS (a gun redesigned solely to win that contract). And they undercut Glock's price, offering the better-specced handgun for about 70% of what Glock was asking. So Sig had some bad years and some bad guns IMO. But I'm starting to think they are again regaining their reputation for quality and price-performance. I shouldn't have been so quick to dismiss Sig because it had some mediocre and even a few bad guns. I'm very impressed with reviews I've seen. Sig says these guns won't wear out any parts for the first 20,000 rounds. A number of experienced reviewers are saying they think it could do it. For the same money as a Tavor, why give up the accuracy? The Sig MCX Virtus Patrol is quite a gun by any measure. And it isn't that big with the folding stock. Anyway, I'm giving Sig a fresh look (and the bullpups a jaundiced eye) and trying to decide if the old Sig we used to know has finally come back to its former glory days. Sig used to be such a premium brand, a real force in the gun industry. The P320 and these MCX rifles/pistols are very strong offerings, reminding me of what Sig used to be. The MCX Virtus and Rattler are both in high demand, both getting premium prices. You could buy two pretty nice AR-15s for the same price. Or a real nice AR-15 and a real nice new handgun. And still have money left for building an ammo stash. But a gun built as a modern battle rifle is in a different class than regular civilian firearms. That's why the Tavor and the MCX and the CZ-805 are getting such strong prices even during the Trump slump. They're all battle rifles adopted by various militaries, special forces, police/SWAT units around the world. If you want military-grade, you just have to pay for it.
Must be nice to be rich. Of those two, I like the MCX Virtus. It's accurate, but it is expensive. You can get an 11.5" barrel for it and, since it has a folding stock, you'd essentially end up with an MCX Rattler. The Virtus is basically a quality AR with a gas piston system. That opens up a wide range of manufacturers to choose from. A piston AR gives you the best of both worlds -- a reliable rifle that you can customize.
I've looked far and wide for anyone who has anything to really complain about with the Virtus. Other than price. : ) I see the older Sig MCX models (non-Virtus) are still retailing for $1400-$1500. And the newer gen-2 Sig MCX Virtus is, if anything, going up slightly in price. I like that the Virtus has Sig's match-grade trigger on it as standard equipment. Some of these other battle rifles come with nasty milspec triggers that everyone seems to hate. A gun that lacks a quality trigger isn't exactly a bargain. I take Sig's inclusion of the trigger as a way for them to keep their prices above the competition because 90% of buyers will be happy with the stock trigger. With the other rifles we've discussed, that isn't true. I didn't like having to buy a decent trigger for several hundred over a high purchase price on these other guns like the Iwi Tavor and a lot of others with bad triggers.
What are the differences between the Sig MCX Patrol and the Sig MCX Virtus Patrol? At quick glance, I don't see any. Trigger?
A two-stage trigger is nice for target shooting where you have time to set up and focus. My S&W 642 .38spl is double-action only and has a trigger pull of 10-12 pounds. But, you can stage it by pulling the trigger until the internal hammer goes back and the cylinder turns and locks. You then feel reduced trigger pressure and can hold it there forever. At that point, an additional 1-2 pounds is all it takes. So, on the range, you can be extremely accurate. But that's not real life.
One thing about the CZ-805 (and a few others) I don't like is the position of the charging handle. It's right under the top rail. You put some optics on top and you're going to be banging your fingers and possibly knocking your scope loose every time you cycle it. Other models with a reciprocating charging handle will break your thumb if you're not careful. Don't get me wrong -- I like a reciprocating charging handle. You have full control of the bolt, forwards and backwards. No "forward assist button" necessary. But watch where they put it.
A number of upgrades, some from factory incremental improvements, others from special forces around the world who requested improved features. Virtus is actually the third-gen iteration and in only about 4 years. The Gen 1's got free upgrades to be almost a Gen 2. The Virtus is supposed to correct anything else and respond to requested military design changes. Sig really wants to lock down some battle rifle contracts with different countries. Sig thinks that Virtus is a big winner for them, a very modern battle rifle with good accuracy and great reliability. And the ability to shoot cheap ammo if you like plinking. What's it worth to rarely get a jam, even with reloads or cheap Wolf ammo? These rifles built as battle rifles just seem to shoot most any ammo well and only really jam on defective bullets, IOW rarely. Your ARX is the same way, built to take whatever round you load it up with. Reliability is what you're mostly paying for with a pricey rifle. Much higher reliability, the ability to shoot 10,000-20,000 rounds - even reloads or Wolf - without parts replacements, that is worth something. I'm not sure if you told me how you liked the ARX once you got to know it. I've seen some reviews that say it is shaped like a salmon but they really like the way it shoots. And the more they shoot it, the more they just like it. It is still considered a very solid value in the reviews I've seen. What do you think of its durability and construction? Easy to clean, easy to clear jams? Happy with most mags? I've never even seen one; this is an area with plenty of guns but not too many high-end guns that you can see in shops.
I see that warning elsewhere in reviews. It does have a few drawbacks. But it is a SCAR clone for $700 less than SCARs. Despite Sig's track record on revising the MCX, I think they have reached their final major iteration. At this point, they have to sell the MCXs to the domestic market and try to lock down military/police contracts around the world and built up their aftermarket support. The aftermarket jumps in much harder if they're confident that the gun manufacturer won't keep changing the design of the gun. The MCX has to stabilize for it to succeed. Sig gives signs that they are highly confident that this is the final iteration of the design. These aftermarket parts really can make or break a gun design any more. If you don't get good aftermarket support, it's very hard to call a gun model a success. This is a big change in the gun market where it has become so ordinary to customize your guns. 20 years ago, that was only for the hardened gun nuts. Now it's about half of gunowners that install aftermarket parts of some kind, maybe more.
Salmon, carp, whatever. Remove the cover on the bottom and Beretta offers a 5" lower picatinny rail that slides over their proprietary rail. Stick in a magazine and it breaks up the rounded style, making it look more like the M41A Pulse Rifle.
I'm out in the country, so I can take it out back and shoot it anytime; but I'm limited to about 100-150 yards before I start shooting off ears of corn. I don't have a scope, so my maximum fun range is about 100 yards. For that, the rifle is terrific. Zero failures of any kind. I really like the modularity, where I can field strip and clean it with no tools. It has two extractors, which guarantee the shell ejects. Steel cased ammo is no problem, though I usually shoot the Winchester white box. I only use the C Products steel magazines, so compatibility is not an issue. The rifle has it's negatives, but those negatives don't affect me. For example, it does not have QD mounts for a sling. But it has plenty of sling loops and Beretta does provide a sling. I wish they had a .300 Blackout barrel. The iron sights are high -- about 4" above the centerline of the barrel. I co-witnessed my red dot, and zero'd everything for 50 yards. This means I shoot about 3" high at 100 yards, according to the Hornady ballistic calculator. www.hornady.com/team-hornady/ballistic-calculators/#!/ The chrome-lined barrel stays squeaky clean, and there's very little carbon fouling elsewhere.
Here's a great product for your rifle that solves the problem of what to do with your thumb -- the polymer Gas Pedal® RS2 Thumb Assist for rifles. I have one and like it. It mounts (either side) on the forward side rail. This keeps your thumb away from your sights and pointing towards the target. $24.50 from GoGun USA. Beware -- there are cheap knockoffs from Hong Kong and elsewhere.
How about a Winchester .224 Valykrie? 1,000 yards. I hate to even ask the price of bullets, let alone custom barrels. Which means it's still probably insanely high.
Everyone has their favorite cartridge. The 6.5mm Grendel is another one. The .22 Nosler. The .300 AAC Blackout. The 6.8 mm Remington SPC (Special Purpose Cartridge).
Some of these new cartridges have astonishing performance in the right gun. Unfortunately, rather pricey guns. I wish these more exotic cartridges had more barrel/bolts available. Maybe the quality AR-15 and compatible barrel/bolt kits are the way to go if you want these choices. When you look at brand-name military/police rifles, it's all 300BLK and 5.56 (including .223). I found some reports on the MCX Patrol I didn't like. Shooting the cheapest ammo can be problematic. SIGtalk: Sig Sauer MCX Patrol Does Not Groups with Federal American Eagle Ammo Using cheap ammo is no excuse for wildly varying 20MOA at 50 yards. I think the MCX is finnicky about cheap 55grain FMJ plinking ammo. Shockingly bad, perhaps. It doesn't help Sig's case that I do buy cheap American Eagle ammo for my Glock 23. It may be a mismatch between a commodity-type inexpensive manufactured round and a particular brand of quality firearm. Even so, you could spend the price of the rifle itself shooting quality ammo over the course of 5,000 rounds or so. The price of the MCX has risen through its recall/upgrade effort by about $500 MSRP and it has gained a pound in the process. Really rotten performance with cheapish ammo doesn't speak well for its factory testing. I did notice at BudsGunShop this prominent banner:
Here ya go, Mr. Long Range Rifle: www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/03/08/army-sets- sights-on-new-sniper-rifle.html The civilian model is the H&K MR308 with 20" barrel. Piston system. .308 Winchester. $4,000. Plus $1,000 for a scope. Save $1,000 and go with the H&K MR556 .223 caliber. Both rifles are heavy -- about 9 pounds.
It's hard to complain about H&K. If money is no object. That's a very serious battle rifle.
#12. To: Tooconservative (#9)
I know buying a kit takes some of the fun out of shopping for accessories
#13. To: misterwhite (#12)
That is the fun part.
When a rifle is loaded up that way, the seller doesn't usually provide top quality accessories.
#14. To: Tooconservative (#13)
#15. To: Tooconservative (#13)
(Edited)
#16. To: misterwhite (#15)
#17. To: Tooconservative (#16)
"I wouldn't be surprised if they give more info if you register for the site."
#18. To: misterwhite (#17)
You can search the web for prices on most of these accessories. The red dot sight, for example, is $69. Hmmmm.
My advice. Get the basic Bushmaster and accessorize as you get the money.
#19. To: Tooconservative (#18)
I've been looking more recently at Sig Sauer MPX, IWI mini-Tabor, Steyr AUG.
#20. To: misterwhite (#17)
(Edited)
#21. To: misterwhite (#19)
Nice guns. You like the bullpups?
#22. To: Tooconservative (#21)
I want it to be actually ambidextrous
#23. To: Tooconservative (#21)
#24. To: misterwhite (#23)
(Edited)
Quick overview of some quality rifles.
They offer a 10" barrel as an option, but never did come out with the .300 AAC Blackout barrel.
#25. To: Tooconservative (#24)
AR-15 is still the gorilla in the room, even if you're trying to pretend it's not there.
#26. To: Tooconservative (#24)
Even excluding the AR15 from this guy's list,
#27. To: misterwhite (#26)
#28. To: Tooconservative (#27)
(Edited)
So I'm still leaning toward IWI Tavor Gen 2
#29. To: misterwhite (#28)
(Edited)
Excellent for close quarters, but not all that great on the range at 100 yards.
#30. To: Tooconservative (#29)
2 MOA just leaves me uneasy.
#31. To: Tooconservative (#29)
A 16" barrel should do a little better than what the Tavor is.
#32. To: misterwhite (#31)
The U.S. version of the IWI Tavor X95 has a 16.5" barrel -- which is required by law. I'm assuming all the X95 accuracy videos used a 16.5" barrel.
#33. To: misterwhite (#30)
But I go back to my original question -- what do you want to do with it? Hunting? Home defense? Target shooting at 100+ yards? Plinking at less than 100 yards?
#34. To: Tooconservative (#32)
So, are you seriously considering an upgrade or just flirting with the idea of what you'd buy if money was a secondary concern?
#35. To: Tooconservative (#32)
Some of these guns can shoot thousands and thousands of cheap rounds
#36. To: misterwhite (#34)
I don't think it would be a bullpup, though.
#37. To: Tooconservative (#36)
"I am looking harder at Sig's MCX Virtus and MCX Rattler."
#38. To: misterwhite (#37)
(Edited)
The Virtus is basically a quality AR with a gas piston system. That opens up a wide range of manufacturers to choose from. A piston AR gives you the best of both worlds -- a reliable rifle that you can customize.
#39. To: Tooconservative (#38)
I see the older Sig MCX models (non-Virtus) are still retailing for $1400-$1500.
#40. To: Tooconservative (#38)
I like that the Virtus has Sig's match-grade trigger on it as standard equipment.
#41. To: Tooconservative (#36)
(Edited)
and the CZ-805
#42. To: misterwhite (#39)
What are the differences between the Sig MCX Patrol and the Sig MCX Virtus Patrol? At quick glance, I don't see any. Trigger?
#43. To: misterwhite (#41)
One thing about the CZ-805 (and a few others) I don't like is the position of the charging handle. It's right under the top rail. You put some optics on top and you're going to be banging your fingers and possibly knocking your scope loose every time you cycle it.
#44. To: Tooconservative (#42)
I've seen some reviews that say it is shaped like a salmon but they really like the way it shoots.
#45. To: Tooconservative (#42)
#46. To: Tooconservative (#43)
#47. To: misterwhite (#45)
#48. To: Tooconservative (#47)
.224 Valykrie
#49. To: misterwhite (#48)
An unexpected large increase in demand has caused delays throughout our supply chain. Please expect longer than normal processing and shipping times on all orders.
We apologize for any inconvenience.
I take it that the dreaded "Trump slump" is over for the time being. America had a year off from gunbuying and ammo stockpiling. These gun and ammo manufacturers must just love Trump now. LOL
#50. To: Tooconservative (#49)
#51. To: misterwhite (#50)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]